Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
My Personal Rejection Thread - Advice Please  
User currently offlineINNflight From Austria, joined Apr 2004, 3765 posts, RR: 60
Posted (8 years 3 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3500 times:

Thought I could need an own thread, so I don't have to open a new one every time I get rejected.  Smile

Quality and Center for the below one, and was really wondering what's wrong with this one?

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...me=20060428_CRW_1235airmaurzrh.jpg

Can't see why NOAquality - no grain, no halos, I don't know?
Regarding NOA center - there is almost exactly on the mm the same distance between tail and top as well as nose gear and bottom...?!

Thanks,
F.


Jet Visuals
23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3496 times:

Quoting INNflight (Thread starter):
there is almost exactly on the mm the same distance between tail and top as well as nose gear and bottom...?!

Quit with the numbers....it's too low in the frame to feel "right", and you cut off the a$s end of the starboard engine. The sooner you learn to stop checking numbers, the better off you will be.

As to the quality part, the image has a foggy feel to it that could be corrected.


User currently offlineAndrewUber From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2528 posts, RR: 41
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3495 times:

Florian!

The Center call is probably because the photo isn't very "balanced" in that you've chopped the #3 engine, but shown the entire left wing. I know you were going for centering the fuselage - and it IS centered - but the chopped engine is probably what killed it. Perhaps re-crop and leave the entire #3 engine, and the same amount of space between the #3 engine and the left side of the frame as between the winglet and the right side of the frame.

As for the NOAquality - the photo might be just a HAIR on the soft side - but frankly I'd just re-crop and re-upload. I can't see the quality issue.

Great shot Flo!

Drew  wave 



I'd rather shoot BAD_MOTIVE
User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 4 days ago) and read 3481 times:

Quoting AndrewUber (Reply 2):
the #3 engine

The cut off #4 engine kills the shot for a.net and its a bit low also.

Peter



-
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3462 times:

Regardless of the numbers, it is too low in the frame. It should "look" right. It does not.


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineGlennstewart From Australia, joined Jun 2003, 1124 posts, RR: 54
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3459 times:

Hi Florian,

Long time, no see.... Everytime I see Austrian landing at SYD, I think of you and Peter and how I really need to get back to Austria!

Btw, the Austrian 777's are looking fantastic in Sydney. I miss Lauda, but the livery is beautiful and it's great to have all three of them with Australian names  Smile (Sydney, Melbourne and OE-LPC was always named after the Australian Cricketer, Don Bradman)...

Anyway, I digress....

I'll reiterate what others have said - little low in the frame and as such, would get a centre reject easily on the first screening.

I'd expect with your experience, that you'd know this already. But to be fair, I have noted much confusion with the centre rejection on this forum of late.

For me, it's a pretty easy rejection to spot, and I'm glad you're posting here because I think more examples on the forums will lead (slowly but surely) to an understanding of the way these are critiqued.


Kindest Regards and well wishes,

Glenn Stewart



Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
User currently offlineRotate From Switzerland, joined Feb 2003, 1491 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 3448 times:

Yep! too low in the frame and the whole cheat line + fensterchen are looking kind of unreal ... , dont worry! Nice for everyone that you also get a rejection from time to time.

 bouncy   bouncy 

Robin



ABC
User currently offlineINNflight From Austria, joined Apr 2004, 3765 posts, RR: 60
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3424 times:

Thanks for your comments guys... I normally always center to make it look right instead of going with numbers, I guess I just had a really bad start into my day this morning.  Smile

I'll just keep it for my collection.

Quoting Rotate (Reply 6):
Nice for everyone that you also get a rejection from time to time

Don't worry Robin, I'm having tons of.  Smile

Btw, Glenn - I'll pm you my messenger add... we have to talk again sometime.

Cheers,
F.



Jet Visuals
User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 64
Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 3409 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Florian

My eye was drawn straight to the engine cut off.

First time I have seen this image too.

Regards

Gary


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11214 posts, RR: 52
Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3366 times:

Quoting Viv (Reply 4):
It should "look" right. It does not.

To whom? I personally think the centering rejection removes a LOT of photographer artistic license from the shots here. I've had similar problems: when I centered the fuselage in the frame, it was considered too high. When I centered the entirety of the plane, it was considered too low. . .

Quoting JeffM (Reply 1):
Quit with the numbers....it's too low in the frame to feel "right", and you cut off the a$s end of the starboard engine. The sooner you learn to stop checking numbers, the better off you will be.

. . . but the numbers are the only thing we have to go on. What "feels right" to you doesn't always "feel right" to me or "feel right" to the screeners. I wish we could get some guidance on that. For instance, this one took forever, and a crop I really didn't want to make to get accepted.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Damon Marcus Lewis




Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 10, posted (8 years 3 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3349 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 9):
but the numbers are the only thing we have to go on

Not so. Centering is a matter of aesthetics. It cannot always be done by the numbers. there will always be an element of subjectivity.

When I centre a shot, I NEVER measure it by the numbers.

[Edited 2006-04-28 22:27:26]


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineWalter2222 From Belgium, joined Sep 2005, 1293 posts, RR: 28
Reply 11, posted (8 years 3 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3343 times:

Quoting Viv (Reply 10):
When I centre a shot, I NEVER measure it by the numbers.

 checkmark 

It 's like the old saying: "if it looks good, it will fly good!"  Smile
The same is true with pictures, it should "feel" good when you look at it, and then it is OK!

Best regards,

Walter



canon 340d ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l is usm - ...
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11214 posts, RR: 52
Reply 12, posted (8 years 3 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 3309 times:

Quoting Viv (Reply 10):
Centering is a matter of aesthetics.

But aesthetics are the extreme of subjectivity. I agree with you in principle and so my main complaint about centering is about how it should be only a loose standard recognizing that reasonable people may reasonably differ on the issue of whether a shot is centered well.

For instance, the whole "lead the action" rule that I was taught (and I'm sure plenty other photographers were taught) is frowned upon here - you'll get a centering rejection every time.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineGlennstewart From Australia, joined Jun 2003, 1124 posts, RR: 54
Reply 13, posted (8 years 3 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 3305 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 12):
For instance, the whole "lead the action" rule that I was taught (and I'm sure plenty other photographers were taught) is frowned upon here - you'll get a centering rejection every time.

I think you "lead the action" to ensure you get the shot in the first place(certainly true with military jets). But in the end by leading the action, you aim to get the shot centred.

Glenn



Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 14, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3264 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think these centering debates are very useful given the difficulties we have providing clarity on this criterion.

For me, Flo, the bigger issue on your shot is the horizontal centering, rather than the vertical. The fact that the main body of the fuselage is biased to the left of the shot is drawn to the viewers' attentions by that engine cowling being cropped out. Had there been more space to the left I think it would have been a much less clear rejection. But having said this - and I do agree about that engine, as mentioned above - many of us have biased the centering of the 'main' part of the aircraft to include the ends of wings etc in the past.

I am grateful to Damon for posting his example shot, and hope that the fact that he has done so will allow me to use it as a subject to comment on:

I see lots of shots like this with the tail of the aircraft almost touching the top of the crop, and there being varying amounts of space below the bottom of the aircraft. According to my subjective mind, this leads to an unbalanced shot - i.e. that subject as a whole is too high in the frame. Can anyone explain to me the rationale for this being correctly centred?

Cheers.

Paul


User currently offlineChris78cpr From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 2819 posts, RR: 51
Reply 15, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3210 times:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jeffrey Mossing



I disagree with Flo's rejection if this is aloud on. I think this JAL shot is great and is well waranted in the DB, dont get me wrong. But i also think Flo's shot is great too and is warranted on the DB as much as that one is. I dont want to offend anyone by posting this, i just wanted to show that off center is good sometimes!

Chris



5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 16, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3208 times:

Quoting Chris78cpr (Reply 15):
I think this JAL shot is great and is well waranted

That photo has balance overall... Flo's doesn't, it's awkward as he posted it.


User currently offlineChris78cpr From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 2819 posts, RR: 51
Reply 17, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3208 times:

Quoting JeffM (Reply 16):
That photo has balance overall... Flo's doesn't, it's awkward as he posted it.

It depends if you know the area. Considering that the fence would have been present in the shot if it had been cropped centered i dont think it is inbalanced. I like the JAL shot and i like Flo's shot.

Chris



5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
User currently offlineEdoca From Belgium, joined Mar 2005, 688 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3205 times:

Quoting Psych (Reply 14):
I am grateful to Damon for posting his example shot, and hope that the fact that he has done so will allow me to use it as a subject to comment on:

I see lots of shots like this with the tail of the aircraft almost touching the top of the crop, and there being varying amounts of space below the bottom of the aircraft. According to my subjective mind, this leads to an unbalanced shot - i.e. that subject as a whole is too high in the frame. Can anyone explain to me the rationale for this being correctly centred?

Very interesting remarks from Damon and Paul indeed. The only rationale I could see is that there is roughly an equal part of blue sky and grey tarmac in this picture, with the plane and background taking up the rest of the area in between. But with all respect to Damon, but it does look a bit awkward indeed.

My last three accepted pics happen to be cases where I cropped to have a roughly equal portion above the tail and below the wheels. I would have thought this was the way airliners.net wants the pictures to be, and they were accepted. Perhaps it's difficult to compare situations though...

Edit: I was trying to find a pic that resembles Flo's situation a bit, perhaps this one comes close:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ward Callens


No perfect equal distances above and below, yet probably OK balance. But it is far from the example shown above I think.

[Edited 2006-04-30 03:08:00]

[Edited 2006-04-30 03:12:19]

User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5678 posts, RR: 45
Reply 19, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3194 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Chris78cpr (Reply 17):
It depends if you know the area. Considering that the fence would have been present in the shot if it had been cropped centered i dont think it is inbalanced

Nothing to do with it...to my mind Florian's photo is out of balance, too low in frame, cropping it that way because there is a fence in the frame does not make it a balanced picture. Let me put it this way, a well composed and well balanced photo should stand on it's own merits not require the viewer to make allowances or to know why it was composed the way it is

I have hundreds of photos that look great in prints or online but are cropped to a different aspect ratio than is acceptable here, because of fences etc.
I think if a 16:9 aspect ratio was allowed at A.net Florian would have a great shot but as it stands now.. not quite.



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2464 posts, RR: 44
Reply 20, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3187 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Flo this is a great shot and if possible to re edit it and resubmit would look great .
All the best with it
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 21, posted (8 years 3 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3181 times:

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 19):
Nothing to do with it...to my mind Florian's photo is out of balance, too low in frame, cropping it that way because there is a fence in the frame does not make it a balanced picture. Let me put it this way, a well composed and well balanced photo should stand on it's own merits not require the viewer to make allowances or to know why it was composed the way it is

Exactly!  bigthumbsup 


User currently offlineGlennstewart From Australia, joined Jun 2003, 1124 posts, RR: 54
Reply 22, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3114 times:

Quoting Chris78cpr (Reply 15):
I think this JAL shot is great and is well waranted in the DB

Chris, this falls into the category of "motivational centering". It's completely allowed but up to the discretion of the screeners to decide if it is motivational or not. We liked this one obviously.

Glenn



Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
User currently offlineChris78cpr From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 2819 posts, RR: 51
Reply 23, posted (8 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3090 times:

Quoting Glennstewart (Reply 22):
Chris, this falls into the category of "motivational centering". It's completely allowed but up to the discretion of the screeners to decide if it is motivational or not. We liked this one obviously.

I like it too! I think the composition with the tower is great, please dont think i was using that example as a bad one.

Chris



5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
My Personal Q&A Thread posted Thu May 4 2006 13:38:06 by Sinkrate
Rejection - Some Advice Please posted Sat Mar 9 2002 01:40:51 by Blackbird1
Blurry Rejection Advice Please posted Sun Oct 22 2006 19:58:16 by INNflight
Quality Rejection - Advice Please posted Mon Sep 11 2006 21:24:14 by UA935
Contrast And Dark Rejection - Advice Please posted Wed Aug 30 2006 22:15:45 by Lanas
Quality Rejection Advice Please posted Sun Aug 13 2006 10:44:40 by Kukkudrill
Quality Rejection Advice Please posted Tue May 16 2006 22:37:24 by Kukkudrill
Rejection- Advice Please posted Mon May 8 2006 08:35:27 by Dendrobatid
Quality Blurry Rejection - Advice Please posted Mon Mar 20 2006 09:37:20 by UA935
NOA_Quality Rejection - Advice Please posted Fri Sep 30 2005 15:16:03 by Kukkudrill